The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-04-25
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS.
Supreme Court
Hon. Byron <. Elliott. Chief-justice.

Hon. Byron <. Elliott. Chief-justice.
The following opinions were rendered April %:
LETTERS OF ADMINIsTRATIoN-sTATUT
1888. Hattie Jones vs.. Adam H. Bittinger, adj
ministrator. Allen, c. c. Affirmed. Howk, j.
Sec. 2227, r. s., is mandatory in form, and
ought to be strictly observed as well by the
court as by the clerk, in vacation, in granting
letters of administration upon an intestate's
estate. But letters of administration granted By
court or clerk out of the order prescribed by
statute are not absolutely null and void. They
are voidable, mercy, and may be revoked or
set aside upon an application to the proper
court, made within the proper time. and by the
party entitled to priority in the issue of such
letters. Until the letters have been so revoked
or set aside, the refusal of the court to grant
other letters to another person, although such
person may be entitled to letters prior to the
one to whom they were issued, is not erroneous
FALSE PRErENsEs-INDIcTMENT.
1871 The State VS.. John w. Conner. Glib
son G. c. Affirmed Niblack ITO sustain
prosecution for obtaining goods under false pre-
lenses 1t must be In legal effect charged in the
Indictment, as well as proved at the trial. that
the goods were obtained by means of the alleged
false pretenses. The false pretenses charged
must have at least entered into the transaction,
and have constituted a material inducement to
the transfer of the possession of the goods
Both counts of the Indictment averred with suf-
fcient certainty the falsity of the representa-
tons by appellee, and that Kellogg & Co. relied.
upon such representations, believing them to be
true, and were thereby deceived. 1t was not
even inferentially charged that it was by means
of such false representations that Kellogg & Co.
were induced to part with the possession of the
goods. The succeeding allegation that eighteen
days after the false representations were SO re-
lied on kellogg 81 Co. sold and delivered these
goods to appellee on credit at his special in
stance and request failed to indicate any natural
logical connection between the false repre-
sentatioas and the sale and delivery OF the
goods
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
1911. l. & ST. L. Railroad Company vs..
Isaac S. Calvert. Vigo S. C.-Proceeding by
appellee to enjoin appellant from laying switch
dlverging from its main track In Iippecanoe
street, in the city of Terre Haute. Appellee
owns lot fronting south on that street A re-
lease had been executed by appellee. the general
scope of which is to release all that part OF Tip
pecanoe and Eighth streets south of the center
line of the street first named The final sfpula-
ton In the release shows that it was the intent
to confine the release to right of-way in the
street to be occupied by one track as then To-
Gated. This must have q reasonable construc-
ton. The track necessarily embraced the road
bed as used. the ties and the rails. Until 1t ap-
pears that the laying of the proposed switch will
in some way impose a burden on plaintiffs soil,
which was not occupied by the track as it was
located and used when the release was executed,
or that 1t impairs the use OF the street, no right
OF Injunction exists.
SCHOOL TREASURER-LIABILITY.
1879. Milton r. Hiatt ct al VS.. The State
ex rel Randolph G. c. Affirmed. Elliott. c..
J.-Suis the official bond of the treasurer of
the board of school trustees of Rdgeville. Il. J
1t was necessary to aver that the officers term
had expired but it is not necessary that it should
be stated in express words. It is enough if it
appears from the facts pleaded. t. The sue
cessor of the outgoing treasurer is proper re-
lator. 49, When officers term Of Office has
expired and be fails to turn the money in his
hands over to his successor action may be
maintained without order of the board of COM
mssioners. a. The retiring treasurer cannot
compel his successor TO receive anything but
money in discharge of the sum due from him in
his official capacity. The treasurer is absolutely
responsible for the safe-keeping OF the money,
and he must pay it over to his successor, and the
school trustees cannot relieve the treasurer
from this duty or responsibility.